Happy New Year everyone! Here are some hopeful thoughts for a more affordable future, in 2026 and beyond.

President Trump recently announced a donation of $6.25 billion by Michael and Susan Dell to kick-start new investment accounts, dubbed “Trump Accounts,” for 25 million qualified American children under 11 years of age. Trump Accounts were established as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) and provide tax deferral for families with children.

Scott Burns posted about the Dells’ gift on his blog, writing that a one-time gift of $2,000 – $8,000 per child could fully fund retirement for the small price of $7.2 to $29 billion per year. He calls it a “Century Fund.”

Burns’ math is a little off because it does not account for inflation, which historically runs at 2-3% per year. A $1 million dollar nest egg (in today’s dollars) would require a $30,000 investment per child at 5.5% annual real return or $10,000 at 6.5% real return.

For 3.6 million children born per year (2024 figures), it would require about $36 billion to $108 billion to fund it annually. That may sound like a lot, but it is actually eminently affordable. Social Security takes in about $1.35 trillion per year, meaning that Burn’s “Century Fund” could cost less than 10% of the current Social Security intake.

That is not to say that Burns suggests redirecting funds from Social Security to the Century Fund. His proposal calls for an increase in the estate tax. If Dell can promise $6.25 billion, I’m sure other billionaires could afford Burns’ proposal.

In fact, I can do better. How about a permanent annual wealth tax of 1% on net worths over $1 billion? That would raise somewhere in the same ballpark ($60 – $130 billion according to ChatGPT). Billionaires could avoid the wealth tax by donating an equivalent amount to the fund, thereby offsetting their taxable income too. Donations could be made in kind (shares of stock, bond certificates, etc.) so there is no net impact on the market.

Superannu-what-tion?

For good reason, however, I don’t think the Trump accounts are the best fit for this proposal. Trump accounts can be accessed at age 18, and don’t have the best tax treatment, negating their value as a retirement vehicle.

Interestingly at the same time he announced the Dells’ donation, Trump mentioned his administration was considering Superannuation, a form of retirement savings fund used by the Australians. In Australia, employers contribute 12% of every employees salary into a “Super” account, giving employees the option to save more. Some key differences between Australia’s Super and the 401k:

• Mandatory vs. Voluntary: Superannuation is required by law in Australia, while 401K plans are strictly voluntary both for employers and their workers. Similarly employer contributions are mandatory (at 12% of pay) in Australia, but not required in the US.
• Standardization: Most Australian workers are automatically placed into a default fund (often a low-cost, diversified MySuper option). While 401K investors have no national standard, fiduciary rules often place investors in Target Date Funds.
• Tax Treatment: Contributions are typically taxed at a flat 15% rate in Australia, while Traditional and Roth 401Ks have more complex tax treatment in the US.
• Portability: Super accounts are fully portable across employers, while 401Ks are typically tied directly to the investor’s job, although rollovers are permitted.
• Fees: Because they are national plans, fees on Super accounts are typically very low, while employer-tied plans in the US may vary significantly in cost structure.

The standardization, fees and portability in particular make Super accounts a much more attractive vehicle for a Century Fund-style national retirement plan funded by a wealth tax. We might call this plan “SuperPlus.”

What’s more, the US government already has excellent low-cost funds available to Federal employees in its Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). These could easily be made available to all American citizens through a SuperPlus TSP:

• G Fund – Government Securities Investment Fund – Invests in short-term U.S. Treasury securities specially issued to the TSP.
• F Fund – Fixed Income Index Investment Fund – Tracks the broad U.S. bond market (Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index).
• C Fund — Common Stock Index Investment Fund – Tracks the S&P 500 index of large and mid-cap U.S. companies.
• S Fund — Small Capitalization Stock Index Investment Fund – Tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Completion Total Stock Market Index
• I Fund — International Stock Index Investment Fund – Tracks developed international stock markets (MSCI EAFE or similar).

All of these funds are incredibly low-cost, with fees of less than 6 basis points (0.06%). They also have a set of lifecycle funds (L Funds), which could serve as the default investment for newborn children in the SuperPlus plan—just add roughly 65 years to the child’s birthdate to get the appropriate fund maturity (e.g., L 2090 for a child born in 2023-2027).

While they aren’t perfect, no one needs more complexity than the TSP funds. They meet the lowest common denominator for amateur investors, keeping them away from high-risk, speculative investments and scams.

A New Consensus or a False Start?

I personally find it fascinating that there is some genuine bipartisan consensus emerging around broader citizen ownership of the economy. The fact that the Trump accounts (and the Dells’ donation) emerged from the most right-wing administration in modern history is surprising.

That is not to say I am without skepticism. If SuperPlus simply serves as another boon for Wall Street but has no discernible impact on worker outcomes (perhaps because employers lower their pay by an equivalent amount), it will have been a waste of time.

That is why combining mandatory contributions with a redistributive estate or wealth tax would be so powerful. It would reverse decades of wealth concentration by putting ownership back in the hands of everyday citizens.

Nevertheless, SuperPlus wouldn’t be a panacea and must be combined with other pro-worker policies: Increasing the minimum wage to enable higher savings rates, anti-monopoly action to foster competition, and democratizing the economy through cooperative enterprises and public ownership of key sectors.